MCA targets uncoded race yachts

[dunedin]

Errr, Is the ARC actually a race? I don't think so. It's the Atlantic Rally for Cruisers.

Different I think. The World Cruising Club have their own specific requirements that apply to boats taking part. Not Harmonised code of practice or World sailing but pretty similar.

The ARC fleet is split into three main groups - cruising multihulls, cruising yachts and racing. Though “handicaps“ are listed even for the cruising fleets, the cruisers can use engines etc and most don’t take their position too seriously. The racing fleet don’t use engines and take things a bit more seriously - though still not like an IRC / RORC style event.
Scarlet Oyster, one of the boats mentioned in the original post, has taken part in the ARC a number of times, I believe generally in the “racing” fleet.
Many / most of the boats in the Racing fleet appear to be crewed by “pay to play” crews, some of them flying UK ensigns, plenty from other nations. But that is only appearances, not checked details on the various boat operator website, which you should do for specifics.

 

[flaming]

I must be missing the point.

I think you might be, but then I think I might be too, as I can't see the point...

The ARC is probably the target of the changes, apparently the rule stretching by some commercial participants has probably brought attention and buggered it up for everyone else. Which is kind of how regulation works in general regardless of industry. shit happens new rules get written and everyone else has to comply.

Yes agree, but why then allow coded boats to be not conform to the code whilst racing? That's the bit that makes no sense to me,

The MCA don’t appear to be interfering with racing. So for the most part racing will be unaffected.
The MCA appear to be flexing some muscle on commercial operations taking part in racing. The result commercial operations probably will have to comply.

Yes, this is nothing at all to do with private sailing. This is only about commercial operations.

I suppose you can call it collateral damage. The rule loop hole which previously or currently allowed a near shore coded boat to enter an offshore race commercially now appears to be closed.

No, that's my point. It isn't. They still allow nearshore coded boats to take part in offshore events commercially provided they conform to the appropriate ISAF code. The only thing that seems to have changed is that they are not any more allowing uncoded boats to do the same, as they did historically.

Ocean racing has had a few recent incidents even though the boats were coded.

I think you're confusing commercial coded with ISAF rules.

 

[Capt.Ron]

Flaming makes some good points. The current code is actually still the (1998)‘blue code’. The Harmonised (2004) code was never actually enacted by legislation, tho the MCA seem to have ‘forgotten’ this...

The blue code 1st edition was 1993, and was derived from the Sail Training vessels code of practice.
It appears that the code is aimed at sail training type vessels and vessels used for non racing type sailing (passengers being taken for a sail).

there are requirements that vessels must have tenders towed or on board for example, and toe rails required even aft of mast. Racing style cookers with inbuilt cylinders are also definitely not allowed.

It would appear that as racing yachts already had appropriate safety requirements to comply with the race rules, section 28 was put in to allow racing charter vessels (who’s commercial operation was under the scope of yacht racing), to operate commercially without having to make their boats compliant with an inappropriate code of practice.

however this seemed to open the door to operators creating their own races to circumvent coding, hence when they wrote their new harmonised code section 28.1 referred to coded boats, and section 28.2 explained that a non coded boat could also race whilst chartered, but only if the races were legit, and to check this, the boat needed to be registered with RYA.
Owing to the fact the enacted regulations (blue code) have not changed nor been updated since 1998, nothing has actually changed.
It appears that instead of actually changing the regulations, the MCA have decided to instead bring prosecutions and then make press releases to scare operators to do whatever the MCA wishes, regardless of how their long-standing regulations were originally interpreted.

it is of note that they have dropped said prosecutions, perhaps indicating that they realised they were going to lose in court...

however the MCA as a prosecution authority can bring any prosecution they like without the likes of the CPS sanity checking it first, giving them more power than the police... With such power at their disposal, operators might be advised to follow MCA wishes, as ultimately it does not seem to matter whether they bother to update regulations or not, they can bring a prosecution regardless!